Originally posted by xDeadcowx
Do you support the First Amendment to the United States Constitution?


My Question to you is, is it possible to disagree with a movement, yet support their First Amendment rights?

DC

Yes.

And yes. See above.

Do you support the rest? Of the amendments?

I think OWS can stay as long as they like, however, if they block doors or streets, then they are infringing another citizens rights.

Westboro baptist annoys the crap out of me, they have no right to trample anothers right to a peaceful funeral.

These men (founding fathers) were well educated and smart people. They weren't perfect.

What's constipation?

(goes back to x-factor)

The 1st amendment gives the right to free speech and to assemble. How ever, it does not give the right to block traffic, crap on sidewalks, public drug use, or to stay on private property such as zuchotti park past closing time. Nor does it give them the right to refuse to FOLLOW THE ORDER OF A POLICE OFFICER! PERIOD!

Yep. But I also support reinstating the 4th Amendment, and would like to reverse the erosion of the 5th Amendment, the 6th Amendment. And I especially support the reinstatement of the 10th Amendment, which has been completely ignored for over 100 years.
We also have to keep a very vigilant eye on the current administration, who has vocally demonstrated a desire to weaken the 2nd Amendment.

There are a ton of ways to go with this one. First of all, remember that each amendment is influenced by other parts of the Constitution and the decisions of the Supreme Court. I haven't looked at them all recently, but as another example, look at the Second Amendment. We don't allow everybody, to go everywhere, at any time, carrying a gun. A homeowner may say "You can't bring that into my house," and few would say that you have been deprived of your Constitutional rights.

Which brings us to the second point. "Congress shall make no law..." In the case you're talking about, the problem is the police behavior (not some law). The police would argue (and win, in my opinion) that the behavior is not in response to the protest, it's in response to the whatever law is being broken at the time, littering, vandalism, drugs, disturbing the peace, etc.

Third, the right isn't as absolute as you think. You can still get into trouble for slander, libel, terroristic threats, announcing that you're a policeman, etc.

My opinions of OWS don't matter here (in fact, I'm not sure what my opinion is), but I don't think the First Amendment route will lead anywhere. (Besides, if there was a good case, the National Lawyer's Guild people would already be all over it.)

Originally posted by AllUrChips
The 1st amendment gives the right to free speech and to assemble. How ever, it does not give the right to block traffic, crap on sidewalks, public drug use, or to stay on private property such as zuchotti park past closing time. Nor does it give them the right to refuse to FOLLOW THE ORDER OF A POLICE OFFICER! PERIOD!

And where they grow cops?A farm in Texas somewhere?

Originally posted by diamondsmith

Originally posted by AllUrChips
The 1st amendment gives the right to free speech and to assemble. How ever, it does not give the right to block traffic, crap on sidewalks, public drug use, or to stay on private property such as zuchotti park past closing time. Nor does it give them the right to refuse to FOLLOW THE ORDER OF A POLICE OFFICER! PERIOD!

And where they grow cops?A farm in Texas somewhere?

Let me and I think I speak for every one when I say, WHAT?

Originally posted by AllUrChips

Originally posted by diamondsmith

Originally posted by AllUrChips
The 1st amendment gives the right to free speech and to assemble. How ever, it does not give the right to block traffic, crap on sidewalks, public drug use, or to stay on private property such as zuchotti park past closing time. Nor does it give them the right to refuse to FOLLOW THE ORDER OF A POLICE OFFICER! PERIOD!

And where they grow cops?A farm in Texas somewhere?

Let me and I think I speak for every one when I say, WHAT?

Sorry for that,but what is....War on Irak?

Just wanted to say that it bothers me when people say "where in the constitution does it say you can ____ (specific random thing that you don't want people doing) ?!"
The constitution doesn't specifically tell me that I can eat cheerios in my car on a saturday morning, but it still allows me to do it. Does it specifically tell me I CAN'T? No, therefor it allows it.

The purpose of the constitution isn't really to be a list of everything government has to allow us to do. The constitution was written in order to LIMIT AND RESTRICT the power of government, NOT the people.

OWS can protest as long as they want.
People are responsible for their own behavior, not their fellow protesters'. If a protester's exercise of rights crosses a line and impedes on another person's constitutional rights (defecates in the doorway of a private business), that person should be punished accordingly or removed from the situation. But it should not affect any other protester's rights to assemble and speak in whatever way they see fit until they personally impede on someone else's rights.

Therefore the police have no right to come in swinging, pepper spraying whatever handicapped pregnant elderly person who happens to be standing in their way.

If you support individual liberty and the Constitution and you appreciate America for what it was intended to be, if you believe in freedom, you can't deny the rights of your fellow Americans, whether or not you agree with their message or lifestyle or hygiene.
That's why we deny partisanship, right? Two sides of the same coin, believing billions in tax dollars can be spent but only on THEIR priorities and interests?

Liberty is liberty. If you don't want your neighbor to have it, you better be willing to give it up yourself.

Originally posted by ladykenzie

If you support individual liberty and the Constitution and you appreciate America for what it was intended to be, if you believe in freedom, you can't deny the rights of your fellow Americans, whether or not you agree with their message or lifestyle or hygiene.
That's why we deny partisanship, right? Two sides of the same coin, believing billions in tax dollars can be spent but only on THEIR priorities and interests?

Liberty is liberty. If you don't want your neighbor to have it, you better be willing to give it up yourself.

Can I come over and take a dump on your front stoop?

Seriously when I think back to the Tea Party and other public meetings where many times with the cameras running we saw elected official talk down to people protesting in an orderly fashion, peacefully assembling, asking questions and getting the verbal smack down or snow job I think what the heck. They dont want to listen when its "done right" then let them have it the other way.

Sadly however the other side of the coin has to many ideas that I dont share. I dont even call it the same coin.

As far as public protest I can still remember when the Boston Massacre was taught in public schools as a righteous public protest that was answered with force. And that force was a demonstration of tyranny.